The Roosevelt Myths vs. The Facts

[PoliticalChic]

Chic, I have suggested a number of time that you get your facts to the nation's historians as soon as possible. The historians, even those that claim to be conservative, are still rating FDR as one of America's best presidents. When they see your facts they will have to immediately change their ratings of FDR.
I only wish I could see those historian's faces when they read your fact sheet about FDR. Convincing a few posters is a waste of time, they don't write history books, nor are their presidential ratings given much credence.
Do it now, Chic, or those historians will continue putting out history books praising FDR, and just as bad is how the people that lived through that era got their facts wrong.

PC has little interest in facts
She is interested in playing USMBs version of Ann Coulter and seeing how many liberals she can piss off

Watch me everybody.....FDR was a commie and the worst President in history
Wanna see my "facts"?

"PC has little interest in facts."

Why don't you provide examples of my posts that are not facts....

...after all...you don't want folks to think you're a liar....do you?

Sorry .....but opinions do not qualify as facts
Neither do Conspiracy Theories

Why don't you provide examples of my posts that are not facts....

...after all...you don't want folks to think you're a liar....do you?[

 

[PoliticalChic]

Chic, I have suggested a number of time that you get your facts to the nation's historians as soon as possible. The historians, even those that claim to be conservative, are still rating FDR as one of America's best presidents. When they see your facts they will have to immediately change their ratings of FDR.
I only wish I could see those historian's faces when they read your fact sheet about FDR. Convincing a few posters is a waste of time, they don't write history books, nor are their presidential ratings given much credence.
Do it now, Chic, or those historians will continue putting out history books praising FDR, and just as bad is how the people that lived through that era got their facts wrong.

You're a fool...but at least you recognize facts.

Are historical facts similar to scientific facts?

Why is it you are unable to find anything in my posts that isn't correct?

Why?

 

[Camp]

Chic, I have suggested a number of time that you get your facts to the nation's historians as soon as possible. The historians, even those that claim to be conservative, are still rating FDR as one of America's best presidents. When they see your facts they will have to immediately change their ratings of FDR.
I only wish I could see those historian's faces when they read your fact sheet about FDR. Convincing a few posters is a waste of time, they don't write history books, nor are their presidential ratings given much credence.
Do it now, Chic, or those historians will continue putting out history books praising FDR, and just as bad is how the people that lived through that era got their facts wrong.

PC has little interest in facts
She is interested in playing USMBs version of Ann Coulter and seeing how many liberals she can piss off

Watch me everybody.....FDR was a commie and the worst President in history
Wanna see my "facts"?

"PC has little interest in facts."

Why don't you provide examples of my posts that are not facts....

...after all...you don't want folks to think you're a liar....do you?

Facts have been repeatedly provided and you act like a kid with her hand stuck in a cookie jar and deny, deny, deny.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. Well, one may say about Roosevelt's mistakes....such were the policies necessary to rescue America.
Really?
To make that a successful argument it is necessary to point out how fruitful, how triumphant the policies were.

They were not. They multiplied the length of most American economic downturns by a factor of four or five.



This, for example....
Crisis gripped the banking system when the new president assumed office on March 4, 1933. Roosevelt’s action to close the banks and declare a nationwide “banking holiday” on March 6 (which did not completely end until nine days later) is still hailed as a decisive and necessary action by Roosevelt apologists.....

The Smoot-Hawley tariff and the Fed’s unconscionable monetary mischief were primary culprits in producing the conditions that gave Roosevelt his excuse to temporarily deprive depositors of their money, and the bank holiday did nothing to alter those fundamentals.

Now get this:
“More than 5,000 banks still in operation when the holiday was declared did not reopen their doors when it ended, and of these, over 2,000 never did thereafter,”... Milton Friedman and Anna Jacobson Schwartz, A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960 (New York: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1963; 9th paperback printing by Princeton University Press, 1993), p.330



“Almost all the failed banks were in states with 15 unit banking laws” — laws that prohibited banks from opening branches and thereby diversifying their portfolios and reducing their risks.

“Although the United States, with its unit banking laws, had thousands of bank failures, Canada, which permitted branch banking, didn’t have a single failure.”
Jim Powell, FDR’s Folly: How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression, p. 32.


Canada didn't have FDR as President.

And, another Roosevelt policy....
Strangely, critics of capitalism who love to blame the market for the Depression never mention that fact..... Roosevelt also single-handedly torpedoed the London Economic Conference in 1933, which was convened at the request of other major nations to bring down tariff rates and restore the gold standard... Roosevelt’s rejection of it [the gold standard] removed most of the remaining impediments to limitless currency and credit expansion. Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed



I hope the Roosevelt-whiners recognize the facts above.

 

[Camp]

PoliticalChic uses this distorted method of calculating unemployment. In fairness, many have used them unknowingly, because, until the figures were investigated by an economist named Darby, they were the figures generally accepted. It means that many of the quotes used by PC are derived from the faulty method. What is dishonest is that some insist on using the old distorted figures without acknowledging the newer more accurate figures.

Here, again, is the difference between the two methods and why the method used by PC and her sources are obsolete and distorted.

fraser.stlouisfed.org/docs/melter/maremp93.pdf

 

[Camp]

Chic, I have suggested a number of time that you get your facts to the nation's historians as soon as possible. The historians, even those that claim to be conservative, are still rating FDR as one of America's best presidents. When they see your facts they will have to immediately change their ratings of FDR.
I only wish I could see those historian's faces when they read your fact sheet about FDR. Convincing a few posters is a waste of time, they don't write history books, nor are their presidential ratings given much credence.
Do it now, Chic, or those historians will continue putting out history books praising FDR, and just as bad is how the people that lived through that era got their facts wrong.

PC has little interest in facts
She is interested in playing USMBs version of Ann Coulter and seeing how many liberals she can piss off

Watch me everybody.....FDR was a commie and the worst President in history
Wanna see my "facts"?

"PC has little interest in facts."

Why don't you provide examples of my posts that are not facts....

...after all...you don't want folks to think you're a liar....do you?

Facts have been repeatedly provided and you act like a kid with her hand stuck in a cookie jar and deny, deny, deny.

Oh, no....

...yet another whining 'is not, is noootttttt; post from the dolt.


Like he's protesting his wife's virtue....when her name is written on bathroom walls all over town.

What did you say about my wife? Clarify yourself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

PoliticalChic uses this distorted method of calculating unemployment. In fairness, many have used them unknowingly, because, until the figures were investigated by an economist named Darby, they were the figures generally accepted. It means that many of the quotes used by PC are derived from the faulty method. What is dishonest is that some insist on using the old distorted figures without acknowledging the newer more accurate figures.

Here, again, is the difference between the two methods and why the method used by PC and her sources are obsolete and distorted.

fraser.stlouisfed.org/docs/melter/maremp93.pdf

Where is any quote of mine you are disputing?????
Where???

See the facts in post #104?

Facts, you dope.

Wadda you say?

 

[rightwinger]

Chic, I have suggested a number of time that you get your facts to the nation's historians as soon as possible. The historians, even those that claim to be conservative, are still rating FDR as one of America's best presidents. When they see your facts they will have to immediately change their ratings of FDR.
I only wish I could see those historian's faces when they read your fact sheet about FDR. Convincing a few posters is a waste of time, they don't write history books, nor are their presidential ratings given much credence.
Do it now, Chic, or those historians will continue putting out history books praising FDR, and just as bad is how the people that lived through that era got their facts wrong.

PC has little interest in facts
She is interested in playing USMBs version of Ann Coulter and seeing how many liberals she can piss off

Watch me everybody.....FDR was a commie and the worst President in history
Wanna see my "facts"?

"PC has little interest in facts."

Why don't you provide examples of my posts that are not facts....

...after all...you don't want folks to think you're a liar....do you?

Sorry .....but opinions do not qualify as facts
Neither do Conspiracy Theories

Why don't you provide examples of my posts that are not facts....

...after all...you don't want folks to think you're a liar....do you?[

Been there, done that...bought the T Shirt

Not about to stoop to reading one of your cut and paste diatribes

 

[PoliticalChic]

Chic, I have suggested a number of time that you get your facts to the nation's historians as soon as possible. The historians, even those that claim to be conservative, are still rating FDR as one of America's best presidents. When they see your facts they will have to immediately change their ratings of FDR.
I only wish I could see those historian's faces when they read your fact sheet about FDR. Convincing a few posters is a waste of time, they don't write history books, nor are their presidential ratings given much credence.
Do it now, Chic, or those historians will continue putting out history books praising FDR, and just as bad is how the people that lived through that era got their facts wrong.

PC has little interest in facts
She is interested in playing USMBs version of Ann Coulter and seeing how many liberals she can piss off

Watch me everybody.....FDR was a commie and the worst President in history
Wanna see my "facts"?

"PC has little interest in facts."

Why don't you provide examples of my posts that are not facts....

...after all...you don't want folks to think you're a liar....do you?

Facts have been repeatedly provided and you act like a kid with her hand stuck in a cookie jar and deny, deny, deny.

Oh, no....

...yet another whining 'is not, is noootttttt; post from the dolt.


Like he's protesting his wife's virtue....when her name is written on bathroom walls all over town.

What did you say about my wife? Clarify yourself.

Now you're reduced to fake outrage?????

Here's the quote:
"Like he's protesting his wife's virtue....when her name is written on bathroom walls all over town."

It's you, pretending to defend the indefensible: Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his abject, total, unremitting failures.



But I will say this about your actual wife: she's long suffering.

 

[Camp]

PoliticalChic uses this distorted method of calculating unemployment. In fairness, many have used them unknowingly, because, until the figures were investigated by an economist named Darby, they were the figures generally accepted. It means that many of the quotes used by PC are derived from the faulty method. What is dishonest is that some insist on using the old distorted figures without acknowledging the newer more accurate figures.

Here, again, is the difference between the two methods and why the method used by PC and her sources are obsolete and distorted.

fraser.stlouisfed.org/docs/melter/maremp93.pdf

Where is any quote of mine you are disputing?????
Where???

See the facts in post #104?

Facts, you dope.

Wadda you say?

I told you to clarify your nasty insult to my wife lady. Clarify your crude statement and insult.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Chic, I have suggested a number of time that you get your facts to the nation's historians as soon as possible. The historians, even those that claim to be conservative, are still rating FDR as one of America's best presidents. When they see your facts they will have to immediately change their ratings of FDR.
I only wish I could see those historian's faces when they read your fact sheet about FDR. Convincing a few posters is a waste of time, they don't write history books, nor are their presidential ratings given much credence.
Do it now, Chic, or those historians will continue putting out history books praising FDR, and just as bad is how the people that lived through that era got their facts wrong.

PC has little interest in facts
She is interested in playing USMBs version of Ann Coulter and seeing how many liberals she can piss off

Watch me everybody.....FDR was a commie and the worst President in history
Wanna see my "facts"?

"PC has little interest in facts."

Why don't you provide examples of my posts that are not facts....

...after all...you don't want folks to think you're a liar....do you?

Sorry .....but opinions do not qualify as facts
Neither do Conspiracy Theories

Why don't you provide examples of my posts that are not facts....

...after all...you don't want folks to think you're a liar....do you?[

Been there, done that...bought the T Shirt

Not about to stoop to reading one of your cut and paste diatribes

Translation: you can find no way to dispute the facts that I post.

QED...Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his abject, total, unremitting failures.


I know....this post is too long, you didn't read it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

PoliticalChic uses this distorted method of calculating unemployment. In fairness, many have used them unknowingly, because, until the figures were investigated by an economist named Darby, they were the figures generally accepted. It means that many of the quotes used by PC are derived from the faulty method. What is dishonest is that some insist on using the old distorted figures without acknowledging the newer more accurate figures.

Here, again, is the difference between the two methods and why the method used by PC and her sources are obsolete and distorted.

fraser.stlouisfed.org/docs/melter/maremp93.pdf

Where is any quote of mine you are disputing?????
Where???

See the facts in post #104?

Facts, you dope.

Wadda you say?

I told you to clarify your nasty insult to my wife lady. Clarify your crude statement and insult.

You know very well it was about Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

 

[Camp]

PoliticalChic uses this distorted method of calculating unemployment. In fairness, many have used them unknowingly, because, until the figures were investigated by an economist named Darby, they were the figures generally accepted. It means that many of the quotes used by PC are derived from the faulty method. What is dishonest is that some insist on using the old distorted figures without acknowledging the newer more accurate figures.

Here, again, is the difference between the two methods and why the method used by PC and her sources are obsolete and distorted.

fraser.stlouisfed.org/docs/melter/maremp93.pdf

Where is any quote of mine you are disputing?????
Where???

See the facts in post #104?

Facts, you dope.

Wadda you say?

I told you to clarify your nasty insult to my wife lady. Clarify your crude statement and insult.

You know very well it was about Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Your facts have been accurately and fairly disputed and shown to be wrong with reliable explanation and links.
You show yourself to be not only a dishonest liar but a slimy kind of creature that gets a sense of false bravado by insulting a person's wife.
Backpeddle all you want, it is obvious who you were insulting. Don't worry, the mods will ignore your behavior. They favor right wing fanatics.

 

[Syriusly]

That's a fact.

Whenever PC says 'That's a fact'- I always check my pocket to see if my wallet is still there.

 

[PoliticalChic]

PoliticalChic uses this distorted method of calculating unemployment. In fairness, many have used them unknowingly, because, until the figures were investigated by an economist named Darby, they were the figures generally accepted. It means that many of the quotes used by PC are derived from the faulty method. What is dishonest is that some insist on using the old distorted figures without acknowledging the newer more accurate figures.

Here, again, is the difference between the two methods and why the method used by PC and her sources are obsolete and distorted.

fraser.stlouisfed.org/docs/melter/maremp93.pdf

Where is any quote of mine you are disputing?????
Where???

See the facts in post #104?

Facts, you dope.

Wadda you say?

I told you to clarify your nasty insult to my wife lady. Clarify your crude statement and insult.

You know very well it was about Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Your facts have been accurately and fairly disputed and shown to be wrong with reliable explanation and links.
You show yourself to be not only a dishonest liar but a slimy kind of creature that gets a sense of false bravado by insulting a person's wife.
Backpeddle all you want, it is obvious who you were insulting. Don't worry, the mods will ignore your behavior. They favor right wing fanatics.

"Your facts have been accurately and fairly disputed ..."

Not a one.

Else you'd have provided an example.

You're a liar, and you've been thoroughly thrashed.


Further...I never insulted your wife....that's your excuse.

 

[PoliticalChic]

That's a fact.

Whenever PC says 'That's a fact'- I always check my pocket to see if my wallet is still there.

Well, then....find a fact that is in dispute.

Or....admit that I am never wrong.

 

[Camp]

That's a fact.

Whenever PC says 'That's a fact'- I always check my pocket to see if my wallet is still there.

Well, then....find a fact that is in dispute.

Or....admit that I am never wrong.

When the facts are revealed, those who have been raised on hagiography, the "Roosevelt is God" groupies, don't try to deny the facts...the squeal like stuck pigs, they obfuscate, they attack the one revealing the facts.


Why not admit the truth?

Answer: because once any truth is admitted, the flood gates would open and their most closely held beliefs and worldview, i.e., Roosevelt and collectivist governance, would dissolve, like sand castles when the tide rolls in.




1. It is a fact that the economic downturn that Republican Warren Harding face was at the least comparable to the one that Franklin Roosevelt face. Harding's plan, "...tax cuts, spending cuts and relatively non-interventionist economic policy,..." ended the recession in a year and a half.

This is not even close to being a fact. The depression faced by Roosevelt began with a market crash that brought unemployment up to over 20%. The market fell drastically in 1920, but it did not crash and the unemployment only reached 11.7% at its highest.
Once again, as you like to ignore, the depression of 1920 did not have to grapple with the Dust Bowl storms which FDR had to deal with beginning in his first years in office.

That's a fact.

Whenever PC says 'That's a fact'- I always check my pocket to see if my wallet is still there.

Well, then....find a fact that is in dispute.

Or....admit that I am never wrong.

You simply do not address responses that show you are being dishonest or that your facts are wrong. This challenge was made in regards to the opening statement to this thread and it has still not been addressed. The claim was also made that the depression or downturn of 1920 was comparable to what FDR faced was disputed but like the opening statement is not addressed.

Additionally, you have failed to address your misuse of unemployment figures and respond to specific questions about why you use the Lebbergott method of calculating when the Darby method is the appropriate method to be used in the circumstances being discussed. You want to present an economic thesis but are unable or unwilling to address purely economic issues.

Still hanging out there is your continued use of Chesly Manly as a reference source when you have repeatedly failed to explain who and what Manly was. Chesly Manly, the pen name for the isolationist libertarian that leaked and exposed American European war contingency plans two days before Pearl Harbor and whose article from the Chicago Tribune was used by Hitler in his Declaration of War against America.

 

[Syriusly]

That's a fact.

Whenever PC says 'That's a fact'- I always check my pocket to see if my wallet is still there.

Well, then....find a fact that is in dispute.

Or....admit that I am never wrong.

I admit that you are always wrong.

And that pointing out facts to you is a waste of time.

So I will just point and laugh at your obsession with attacking FDR.

 

[PoliticalChic]

That's a fact.

Whenever PC says 'That's a fact'- I always check my pocket to see if my wallet is still there.

Well, then....find a fact that is in dispute.

Or....admit that I am never wrong.

When the facts are revealed, those who have been raised on hagiography, the "Roosevelt is God" groupies, don't try to deny the facts...the squeal like stuck pigs, they obfuscate, they attack the one revealing the facts.


Why not admit the truth?

Answer: because once any truth is admitted, the flood gates would open and their most closely held beliefs and worldview, i.e., Roosevelt and collectivist governance, would dissolve, like sand castles when the tide rolls in.




1. It is a fact that the economic downturn that Republican Warren Harding face was at the least comparable to the one that Franklin Roosevelt face. Harding's plan, "...tax cuts, spending cuts and relatively non-interventionist economic policy,..." ended the recession in a year and a half.

This is not even close to being a fact. The depression faced by Roosevelt began with a market crash that brought unemployment up to over 20%. The market fell drastically in 1920, but it did not crash and the unemployment only reached 11.7% at its highest.
Once again, as you like to ignore, the depression of 1920 did not have to grapple with the Dust Bowl storms which FDR had to deal with beginning in his first years in office.

That's a fact.

Whenever PC says 'That's a fact'- I always check my pocket to see if my wallet is still there.

Well, then....find a fact that is in dispute.

Or....admit that I am never wrong.

You simply do not address responses that show you are being dishonest or that your facts are wrong. This challenge was made in regards to the opening statement to this thread and it has still not been addressed. The claim was also made that the depression or downturn of 1920 was comparable to what FDR faced was disputed but like the opening statement is not addressed.

Additionally, you have failed to address your misuse of unemployment figures and respond to specific questions about why you use the Lebbergott method of calculating when the Darby method is the appropriate method to be used in the circumstances being discussed. You want to present an economic thesis but are unable or unwilling to address purely economic issues.

Still hanging out there is your continued use of Chesly Manly as a reference source when you have repeatedly failed to explain who and what Manly was. Chesly Manly, the pen name for the isolationist libertarian that leaked and exposed American European war contingency plans two days before Pearl Harbor and whose article from the Chicago Tribune was used by Hitler in his Declaration of War against America.

I clearly marked facts throughout the thread, and you were given every opportunity to dispute any of them.

We both know why you couldn't: I am never wrong.

And you have been an excellent witness to that fact.

 

[PoliticalChic]

That's a fact.

Whenever PC says 'That's a fact'- I always check my pocket to see if my wallet is still there.

Well, then....find a fact that is in dispute.

Or....admit that I am never wrong.

I admit that you are always wrong.

And that pointing out facts to you is a waste of time.

So I will just point and laugh at your obsession with attacking FDR.

"And that pointing out facts to you is a waste of time."

A pretty flaccid excuse as to why you couldn't find a single one of my facts to dispute.

You, also, have proven an excellent witness proving my accuracy, and veracity.